Holy Shiiiit! Pixies Boxset Unveiled

[lokithelion]

NIN has more fans than the Pixies and they didn't rape their fans wallets.

[Snaggle Von Swift]

# Come on Pilgrim (1987), Surfer Rosa (1988), Doolittle (1989), Bossanova (1990), and Trompe le Monde (1991) on 24k gold-plated CDs, mastered for 5.1 surround sound

# Come on Pilgrim (1987), Surfer Rosa (1988), Doolittle (1989), Bossanova (1990), and Trompe le Monde (1991) on DVD/Blu-Ray discs, mastered for 5.1 surround sound

so you're getting a blu ray audio disc of what you're already getting on 'gold plated' cd?

[troymess]

I like the idea of having some great Pixies albums in the best form of audio (multiple forms) possible, but shit...$495 is no where NEAR tempting. Sorry...good luck selling those!

[rtw88]

I don't really understand all this box set nonsense. What's the point in putting out a box set that comes out to over $20 a record, especially when all of the album are still in print for less than that?

In my opinion, a box set should be a good, cheap way for a new listener to get as much stuff as they can from a band, or to give an old fan who never picked much up a chance to get it all cheaper than buying separately. It just seems like anyone willing to spend 500 bucks on this thing probably already owns all of the albums, whereas if it were like $200, you might have a lot of on the fence people more inclined to pick it up.

But whatever. If you want to get rich ripping your fans off, then who am I to tell you not to?

[deville]

my fist car cost less than this.

[circlingvultures]

[xxmartinxx]

Ok sure a few million fans, who have been buying their stuff all along. None of it is hard to find at all and they just recently repressed the lps! I find it hard to believe that that many people are going to want to buy all the stuff that they already own just because its "limited".

If you're thinking of starting a pixies collection I would wait until this drops and everyone who buys this dumps their originals and ebay is flooded with them.

This would be true if people would be will to dump $500 on this thing. I love the Pixies, but I'm not about to.

AINR will be sitting on these for YEARS.

[circlingvultures]

Ok sure a few million fans, who have been buying their stuff all along. None of it is hard to find at all and they just recently repressed the lps! I find it hard to believe that that many people are going to want to buy all the stuff that they already own just because its "limited".

If you're thinking of starting a pixies collection I would wait until this drops and everyone who buys this dumps their originals and ebay is flooded with them.

This would be true if people would be will to dump $500 on this thing. I love the Pixies, but I'm not about to.

AINR will be sitting on these for YEARS.

These will most certainly be collecting dust for a while. Flippers will be buying and they will be all over ebay but besides older fans and rich hipsters, your average pixies fan most likely wont buy them. Those that do buy them most likely will never listen to either the cds or the vinyl.

[xlovecolouredx]

pricy.

i know how this band awesome.

they are one of my favourite brit band.

but almost 500 usd for wax and almost 200 usd for cd is expensive....

[gravitylovesdrunks]

pricy.

i know how this band awesome.

they are one of my favourite brit band.

but almost 500 usd for wax and almost 200 usd for cd is expensive....

they were american, yu. like cheeseburgers and dying alone.

[steventangent]

Here's what get's me. You get the CD's, the DVD's and the LP's of all the albums. Do you really need these albums in three mediums?

Also, the ultimate kick in the dick is the gold plated CDs. Seriously? It sounds no better than an ordinary CD. To quote David Cross, "Talk about the ultimate 'fuck you, poor people'".

"media"

[melikecheese]

I love these threads just because so many people seem to be personally offended by the price of something. Then you add on the presumptions that only flippers will buy them and those who do will not listen to them and its good for a laugh. 3K Pixies fans with jobs that pay them more then minimum wage is not that hard to imagine.

[xxmartinxx]

I love these threads just because so many people seem to be personally offended by the price of something. Then you add on the presumptions that only flippers will buy them and those who do will not listen to them and its good for a laugh. 3K Pixies fans with jobs that pay them more then minimum wage is not that hard to imagine.

I'm a Pixies fan who has a job that pays significantly more than minimum wage. I'm not buying it.

[circlingvultures]

If it were $150 I wouldn't buy it because I don't give a fuck about the pixies and believe me I can afford it. The point is these douches are slapping the title limited edition on something to drive up the price. There's nothing in there that mostly everyone has agreed upon is worth that much money.

Buy the set. Its clearly marketed towards you.

[gravitylovesdrunks]

the term "limited edition" is relevant. for a small DIY band, a limited edition might be a run of 300 records. for a band that was responsible for influencing a huge part of music in the late 80s/early 90s and toured the world over, 3000 is a limited edition.

nobody's arguing that the price isn't ridiculous though- it is.

[mxv]

So glad I was never a Pixies fan because if I was, I'd be awfully insulted with the price of this thing. F' em!

[controlthebleeding]

you all have to take into account the cost of doing this product. you can't merely make a reference of it being expensive because how much the albums cost or what not.. packaging is a big deal, especially when this are art books/print/cds/lps/dvd combo. xxmartinxx you are nuts to think this would cost only $50 to produce. giclees alone are not cheap to produce at that size, even for that #. I worked for a company that would charge me cost and i was still paying $15 for a 20" x 20" print.

You also have to take into consideration the price the artists charge (which is not cheap). plus product. This isn't just a one shot album cover. I see $500 being on par for this box set of 3000. plus 25 random people will be getting a box of test pressings to add to the collection.

would i buy it? no. While i love the pixies i don't like the artist enough to pay that? if joel peter witkin was doing the artwork, i'd do it in a heartbeat.

[xxmartinxx]

you all have to take into account the cost of doing this product. you can't merely make a reference of it being expensive because how much the albums cost or what not.. packaging is a big deal, especially when this are art books/print/cds/lps/dvd combo. xxmartinxx you are nuts to think this would cost only $50 to produce. giclees alone are not cheap to produce at that size, even for that #. I worked for a company that would charge me cost and i was still paying $15 for a 20" x 20" print.

You also have to take into consideration the price the artists charge (which is not cheap). plus product. This isn't just a one shot album cover. I see $500 being on par for this box set of 3000. plus 25 random people will be getting a box of test pressings to add to the collection.

would i buy it? no. While i love the pixies i don't like the artist enough to pay that? if joel peter witkin was doing the artwork, i'd do it in a heartbeat.

"Giclee" is a fancy word for "inkjet printer print". I can do them on my Lexmark $50 from Sam's Club printer. It's the cheapest type of print you can do. So that's bullshit.

The rest of the packaging, when made in bulk in the order of 3000 units, would not be that expensive. Things get significantly cheaper as number increases. Not to mention a lot of the $500 set is the same as the $175 set, so that's actually being made in an even higher quantity.

This box set has "fail" written all over it. Is there 3000 people that would like this box set? Sure. Are there 3000 people that will pay $500 to own it? No fucking way. I'd bet that within one year they have sold less than 1000.

It might be different if their LPs were out of print and fetching a lot of money on eBay or something, but that's not the case. You can walk into most any indie record shop and pick them up for around $10 each. One tenth of the cost of this set. Let's face it, if you want the vinyl, you probably don't care about the CDs.

People want to say, "well, look at the NIN box set! That sold out!" NIN has way more fans than the Pixies. Plus that set was $200 less. Plus that set had 500 less copies. Plus I believe that set was the only way you could get the vinyl of that album. Not even close to the same situation.

If there was only 1000 copies, I might say that still 500 too many at this price.

Epic fail.

[controlthebleeding]

you all have to take into account the cost of doing this product. you can't merely make a reference of it being expensive because how much the albums cost or what not.. packaging is a big deal, especially when this are art books/print/Cd's/lps/dvd combo. xxmartinxx you are nuts to think this would cost only $50 to produce. giclees alone are not cheap to produce at that size, even for that #. I worked for a company that would charge me cost and i was still paying $15 for a 20" x 20" print.

You also have to take into consideration the price the artists charge (which is not cheap). plus product. This isn't just a one shot album cover. I see $500 being on par for this box set of 3000. plus 25 random people will be getting a box of test pressings to add to the collection.

would i buy it? no. While i love the pixies i don't like the artist enough to pay that? if joel peter witkin was doing the artwork, i'd do it in a heartbeat.

"Giclee" is a fancy word for "inkjet printer print". I can do them on my Lexmark $50 from Sam's Club printer. It's the cheapest type of print you can do. So that's bullshit.

The rest of the packaging, when made in bulk in the order of 3000 units, would not be that expensive. Things get significantly cheaper as number increases. Not to mention a lot of the $500 set is the same as the $175 set, so that's actually being made in an even higher quantity.

This box set has "fail" written all over it. Is there 3000 people that would like this box set? Sure. Are there 3000 people that will pay $500 to own it? No fucking way. I'd bet that within one year they have sold less than 1000.

It might be different if their LPs were out of print and fetching a lot of money on eBay or something, but that's not the case. You can walk into most any indie record shop and pick them up for around $10 each. One tenth of the cost of this set. Let's face it, if you want the vinyl, you probably don't care about the CDs.

People want to say, "well, look at the NIN box set! That sold out!" NIN has way more fans than the Pixies. Plus that set was $200 less. Plus that set had 500 less copies. Plus I believe that set was the only way you could get the vinyl of that album. Not even close to the same situation.

If there was only 1000 copies, I might say that still 500 too many at this price.

Epic fail.

You do have a point about a giclee being a over glorified inkjet copy.. but that's like saying a marshall is just a glorified fender (as it basically is somewhat since marshall worked on fenders at one point and just went off of those schematics of a basman to start off with) i wouldn't say you can print a archival print on your printer.. different inks. anyone who prints these professionaly wouldnt say you get the same kind of print from a inkjet than you do from a professional. I have printed both, and my prints have faded over the last several years over my archival prints that i bought from other artists. While not quite that much, they have faded over the period of time. This has been at least 10 years. Besides go buy a printer that prints 19" x 15" photos and see how much ink you go through i have a canon i9900 and i went through at least $50 on paper and inks for 15 copies. full color. before it started fading out. please don't talk to me like i don't know what I'm speaking about. I've worked at a professional printing press/lab. I know a little about packaging and printing. a lexmark print is not the same a professional quality archival print that you most likely will get in that box set.

Besides when i called you nuts. i was being facetious. i wasn't intending to be malicious. so please don't take this as some kind of insult rather than points being made. epic fail it is not.

as far as the books. especially color and of that size are not cheap. find a printer that'll make you 3000 books of that content and size for less than $10 each. Why do you think art books of that nature are so expensive usually. add the lp's (probably $4 each), the cd's w/ packaging ($2 average), the other art book, packaging, not to mention labor costs (that's where the packaging prices are raised), I'm pretty sure it exceeds $50. Plus put in all the pricing for the artist work and production, what the band gets off it, etc etc. and tack on another chunk of change for profit margin..i'm sure what you would pay for each if everything was separate at regular cost and I'm sure it comes out close to $500.

I'm sure the cost in material is probably less than your $75, but with labor costs, I'm sure it would exceed that. just because you build an amp for $300 worth of material (including speakers) doesn't necessarily mean it's worth $300. boutique amps usually only use about $200 in material, but wind up costing $900 or so. go figure.

I don't necessarily disagree that it's not worth $500 because I'm sure most of us can do without the gold cd's or even the cd's in general, but take into account the over sized book, the smaller cd booklet, the print, the cd's/dvd's/lp's, plus artist compensation (both the band and artist), design, then the actual label, plus the 20% markup. you get that price.

Now im sure if it didnt have the artist prints and books, i suppose thing would be next to nothing, but you put a art book in it, and that substantially raises the price a whole lot. i pay $50 for art books much smaller and of larger quantity, so maybe thats why this doenst seem all that weird to me.

again, i wouldn't pay for it. i don't need all that stuff, and i don't care for the artist as much as maybe some do. but i do see why they charged that much.

as far as selling, neither you or i know how fast it will sell. most likely there will be 3000 people to buy this. i don't see only 1000 being sold. i see a few more..maybe 1004

[melikecheese]

you all have to take into account the cost of doing this product. you can't merely make a reference of it being expensive because how much the albums cost or what not.. packaging is a big deal, especially when this are art books/print/cds/lps/dvd combo. xxmartinxx you are nuts to think this would cost only $50 to produce. giclees alone are not cheap to produce at that size, even for that #. I worked for a company that would charge me cost and i was still paying $15 for a 20" x 20" print.

You also have to take into consideration the price the artists charge (which is not cheap). plus product. This isn't just a one shot album cover. I see $500 being on par for this box set of 3000. plus 25 random people will be getting a box of test pressings to add to the collection.

would i buy it? no. While i love the pixies i don't like the artist enough to pay that? if joel peter witkin was doing the artwork, i'd do it in a heartbeat.

"Giclee" is a fancy word for "inkjet printer print". I can do them on my Lexmark $50 from Sam's Club printer. It's the cheapest type of print you can do. So that's bullshit.

The rest of the packaging, when made in bulk in the order of 3000 units, would not be that expensive. Things get significantly cheaper as number increases. Not to mention a lot of the $500 set is the same as the $175 set, so that's actually being made in an even higher quantity.

This box set has "fail" written all over it. Is there 3000 people that would like this box set? Sure. Are there 3000 people that will pay $500 to own it? No fucking way. I'd bet that within one year they have sold less than 1000.

It might be different if their LPs were out of print and fetching a lot of money on eBay or something, but that's not the case. You can walk into most any indie record shop and pick them up for around $10 each. One tenth of the cost of this set. Let's face it, if you want the vinyl, you probably don't care about the CDs.

People want to say, "well, look at the NIN box set! That sold out!" NIN has way more fans than the Pixies. Plus that set was $200 less. Plus that set had 500 less copies. Plus I believe that set was the only way you could get the vinyl of that album. Not even close to the same situation.

If there was only 1000 copies, I might say that still 500 too many at this price.

Epic fail.

Lots of speculation. I think you are wrong, I think they will sell fine, your also forgetting/leaving out that they need to pay people for their time, something not included in the box set, but resulted in the boxset. You don't need to sell them in a week to make profit either.

For some fun, Lets look at some numbers to try to back up what we are spitting, Last.fm

Pixies listeners = 992,331

NIN listeners = 1,060,504

not a big difference.

Google trends

http://www.google.com/trends?q=nine+inch+nails%2C+nin%2C+pixies&ctab=0&geo=all&date=all&sort=0

search traffic is higher for nin and nine inch nails over pixies so maybe more people are interested in buying nin stuff.

Viewing sales rank at Amazon, which sadly do not offer much reporting, NIN is ahead in sales rank.

blogpulse trends also show a higher rating for past 6 months of blogging on both nin and nine inch nails.

http://www.blogpulse.com/trend?query1=nine+inch+nails&label1=nine+inch+nails&query2=nin&label2=nin&query3=pixies&label3=pixies&days=180&x=20&y=7

So you might be right good sir.

[xxmartinxx]

You do have a point about a giclee being a over glorified inkjet copy.. but that's like saying a marshall is just a glorified fender (as it basically is somewhat since marshall worked on fenders at one point and just went off of those schematics of a basman to start off with) i wouldn't say you can print a archival print on your printer.. different inks. anyone who prints these professionaly wouldnt say you get the same kind of print from a inkjet than you do from a professional. I have printed both, and my prints have faded over the last several years over my archival prints that i bought from other artists. While not quite that much, they have faded over the period of time. This has been at least 10 years. Besides go buy a printer that prints 19" x 15" photos and see how much ink you go through i have a canon i9900 and i went through at least $50 on paper and inks for 15 copies. full color. before it started fading out. please don't talk to me like i don't know what I'm speaking about. I've worked at a professional printing press/lab. I know a little about packaging and printing. a lexmark print is not the same a professional quality archival print that you most likely will get in that box set.

Besides when i called you nuts. i was being facetious. i wasn't intending to be malicious. so please don't take this as some kind of insult rather than points being made. epic fail it is not.

as far as the books. especially color and of that size are not cheap. find a printer that'll make you 3000 books of that content and size for less than $10 each. Why do you think art books of that nature are so expensive usually. add the lp's (probably $4 each), the cd's w/ packaging ($2 average), the other art book, packaging, not to mention labor costs (that's where the packaging prices are raised), I'm pretty sure it exceeds $50. Plus put in all the pricing for the artist work and production, what the band gets off it, etc etc. and tack on another chunk of change for profit margin..i'm sure what you would pay for each if everything was separate at regular cost and I'm sure it comes out close to $500.

I'm sure the cost in material is probably less than your $75, but with labor costs, I'm sure it would exceed that. just because you build an amp for $300 worth of material (including speakers) doesn't necessarily mean it's worth $300. boutique amps usually only use about $200 in material, but wind up costing $900 or so. go figure.

I don't necessarily disagree that it's not worth $500 because I'm sure most of us can do without the gold cd's or even the cd's in general, but take into account the over sized book, the smaller cd booklet, the print, the cd's/dvd's/lp's, plus artist compensation (both the band and artist), design, then the actual label, plus the 20% markup. you get that price.

Now im sure if it didnt have the artist prints and books, i suppose thing would be next to nothing, but you put a art book in it, and that substantially raises the price a whole lot. i pay $50 for art books much smaller and of larger quantity, so maybe thats why this doenst seem all that weird to me.

again, i wouldn't pay for it. i don't need all that stuff, and i don't care for the artist as much as maybe some do. but i do see why they charged that much.

as far as selling, neither you or i know how fast it will sell. most likely there will be 3000 people to buy this. i don't see only 1000 being sold. i see a few more..maybe 1004

My point about giclee prints is that based on it's definition, you have no idea what quality of print you are getting. Like I said, I could print out a picture on my home printer and call it a giclee print. I would be more impressed with a lithograph or a silk screened print.

As far as labor goes, I'm sure two dudes could assemble these in a drunken weekend. But let's say you go big and get four dudes and pay them $500 a day. That's only leaves $1,481,000 of net profit. You're right, that labor cost is going to sink them.

Let's get crazy and say their cost per unit is $100. That leaves them with a gross profit of $1,181,000. That's off a "limited edition" item.

Regarding your guitar amplifier metaphor, it's so incorrect on so many levels. First off, the transformers in a boutique guitar amp cost more than $200. They also cost three to five times more than your assumed price. A new Peavey amp costs more than $900. Also, the man hours involved in creating a guitar amp, especially a point to point wired amp, is significant. You can package up all those Pixies box sets and still only have maybe two or three PTP wired amps.

[xxmartinxx]

Lots of speculation. I think you are wrong, I think they will sell fine, your also forgetting/leaving out that they need to pay people for their time, something not included in the box set, but resulted in the boxset. You don't need to sell them in a week to make profit either.

For some fun, Lets look at some numbers to try to back up what we are spitting, Last.fm

Pixies listeners = 992,331

NIN listeners = 1,060,504

not a big difference.

Google trends

http://www.google.com/trends?q=nine+inch+nails%2C+nin%2C+pixies&ctab=0&geo=all&date=all&sort=0

search traffic is higher for nin and nine inch nails over pixies so maybe more people are interested in buying nin stuff.

Viewing sales rank at Amazon, which sadly do not offer much reporting, NIN is ahead in sales rank.

blogpulse trends also show a higher rating for past 6 months of blogging on both nin and nine inch nails.

http://www.blogpulse.com/trend?query1=nine+inch+nails&label1=nine+inch+nails&query2=nin&label2=nin&query3=pixies&label3=pixies&days=180&x=20&y=7

So you might be right good sir.

I'm confused by this post. You start off saying I'm wrong, then by the end you seem to be conceding that I might be right. I'm confused.

You really don't need to be that scientific about it. NIN has had multiple hits. The Pixies has never ever had a song that had received any significant airplay. I would bet that if you asked the average person on the street "Have you ever heard of Nine Inch Nails" the majority would say yes. If you asked the same question about the Pixies I'd bet almost no one would know who they are.

NIN is a mainstream band. The Pixies, despite being highly influential, are an obscure band. Fugazi and the Bad Brains were highly influential, it doesn't mean that people know who they are or that they have a massive fan base.

[controlthebleeding]

You do have a point about a giclee being a over glorified inkjet copy.. but that's like saying a marshall is just a glorified fender (as it basically is somewhat since marshall worked on fenders at one point and just went off of those schematics of a basman to start off with) i wouldn't say you can print a archival print on your printer.. different inks. anyone who prints these professionaly wouldnt say you get the same kind of print from a inkjet than you do from a professional. I have printed both, and my prints have faded over the last several years over my archival prints that i bought from other artists. While not quite that much, they have faded over the period of time. This has been at least 10 years. Besides go buy a printer that prints 19" x 15" photos and see how much ink you go through i have a canon i9900 and i went through at least $50 on paper and inks for 15 copies. full color. before it started fading out. please don't talk to me like i don't know what I'm speaking about. I've worked at a professional printing press/lab. I know a little about packaging and printing. a lexmark print is not the same a professional quality archival print that you most likely will get in that box set.

Besides when i called you nuts. i was being facetious. i wasn't intending to be malicious. so please don't take this as some kind of insult rather than points being made. epic fail it is not.

as far as the books. especially color and of that size are not cheap. find a printer that'll make you 3000 books of that content and size for less than $10 each. Why do you think art books of that nature are so expensive usually. add the lp's (probably $4 each), the cd's w/ packaging ($2 average), the other art book, packaging, not to mention labor costs (that's where the packaging prices are raised), I'm pretty sure it exceeds $50. Plus put in all the pricing for the artist work and production, what the band gets off it, etc etc. and tack on another chunk of change for profit margin..i'm sure what you would pay for each if everything was separate at regular cost and I'm sure it comes out close to $500.

I'm sure the cost in material is probably less than your $75, but with labor costs, I'm sure it would exceed that. just because you build an amp for $300 worth of material (including speakers) doesn't necessarily mean it's worth $300. boutique amps usually only use about $200 in material, but wind up costing $900 or so. go figure.

I don't necessarily disagree that it's not worth $500 because I'm sure most of us can do without the gold cd's or even the cd's in general, but take into account the over sized book, the smaller cd booklet, the print, the cd's/dvd's/lp's, plus artist compensation (both the band and artist), design, then the actual label, plus the 20% markup. you get that price.

Now im sure if it didnt have the artist prints and books, i suppose thing would be next to nothing, but you put a art book in it, and that substantially raises the price a whole lot. i pay $50 for art books much smaller and of larger quantity, so maybe thats why this doenst seem all that weird to me.

again, i wouldn't pay for it. i don't need all that stuff, and i don't care for the artist as much as maybe some do. but i do see why they charged that much.

as far as selling, neither you or i know how fast it will sell. most likely there will be 3000 people to buy this. i don't see only 1000 being sold. i see a few more..maybe 1004

As far as labor goes, I'm sure two dudes could assemble these in a drunken weekend. But let's say you go big and get four dudes and pay them $500 a day. That's only leaves $1,481,000 of net profit. You're right, that labor cost is going to sink them.

Let's get crazy and say their cost per unit is $100. That leaves them with a gross profit of $1,181,000. That's off a "limited edition" item.

Regarding your guitar amplifier metaphor, it's so incorrect on so many levels. First off, the transformers in a boutique guitar amp cost more than $200. They also cost three to five times more than your assumed price. A new Peavey amp costs more than $900. Also, the man hours involved in creating a guitar amp, especially a point to point wired amp, is significant. You can package up all those Pixies box sets and still only have maybe two or three PTP wired amps.

my bad. i meant a cab.. not a amp.. hell amps cost way more than $200. i should have seen that.

where are you getting your #'s..

say it's $75 to package. that's just the cost of the materials and production. then you have to take into account how much the artists make, then how much the designers make. the the actual labor to package them to ship, plus promotion, then paying the designers for designing the layouts of the promotion materals. etc etc.. You never know.

you know what... come to think of it, now that i average out the #'s on a calculator, somene is asking for way too much? either the label, the artist, or the band?

WHen i originally had some thought on the price, i gave the price that the materials are worth as a list price individually, but usually the worth includes artist saleries, etc etc.. i'm starting to see your reasoning...

do you think maybe the band or label asked for a large amount of money for rights and what not to release this? hence the steep price? i can't see someone making a $1,000,000 profit and the band making next to nothing.

[xxmartinxx]

my bad. i meant a cab.. not a amp.. hell amps cost way more than $200. i should have seen that.

where are you getting your #'s..

say it's $75 to package. that's just the cost of the materials and production. then you have to take into account how much the artists make, then how much the designers make. the the actual labor to package them to ship, plus promotion, then paying the designers for designing the layouts of the promotion materals. etc etc.. You never know.

you know what... come to think of it, now that i average out the #'s on a calculator, somene is asking for way too much? either the label, the artist, or the band?

WHen i originally had some thought on the price, i gave the price that the materials are worth as a list price individually, but usually the worth includes artist saleries, etc etc.. i'm starting to see your reasoning...

do you think maybe the band or label asked for a large amount of money for rights and what not to release this? hence the steep price? i can't see someone making a $1,000,000 profit and the band making next to nothing.

Who knows what the band cut is. Half, maybe?

If you watch the video, most of the art for it was done by art students, so I'm sure they didn't get paid. They were probably doing it for extra credit or something.

I can't see the artist getting paid more than $25,000, which is still a nice chunk of change.

They are charging $30 shipping for FedEx Ground. I've shipped tons of stuff FedEx. If you're a business that ships a lot they give you a great discount, too. So their making money on the shipping, too. Probably enough to negate the cost of paying someone $10 an hour to package these up.

It's one of the most transparent money grabs I've ever seen.

If you're worried about this selling out, fear not. Limit 2 per customer.

[controlthebleeding]

my bad. i meant a cab.. not a amp.. hell amps cost way more than $200. i should have seen that.

where are you getting your #'s..

say it's $75 to package. that's just the cost of the materials and production. then you have to take into account how much the artists make, then how much the designers make. the the actual labor to package them to ship, plus promotion, then paying the designers for designing the layouts of the promotion materals. etc etc.. You never know.

you know what... come to think of it, now that i average out the #'s on a calculator, somene is asking for way too much? either the label, the artist, or the band?

WHen i originally had some thought on the price, i gave the price that the materials are worth as a list price individually, but usually the worth includes artist saleries, etc etc.. i'm starting to see your reasoning...

do you think maybe the band or label asked for a large amount of money for rights and what not to release this? hence the steep price? i can't see someone making a $1,000,000 profit and the band making next to nothing.

Who knows what the band cut is. Half, maybe?

If you watch the video, most of the art for it was done by art students, so I'm sure they didn't get paid. They were probably doing it for extra credit or something.

I can't see the artist getting paid more than $25,000, which is still a nice chunk of change.

They are charging $30 shipping for FedEx Ground. I've shipped tons of stuff FedEx. If you're a business that ships a lot they give you a great discount, too. So their making money on the shipping, too. Probably enough to negate the cost of paying someone $10 an hour to package these up.

It's one of the most transparent money grabs I've ever seen.

If you're worried about this selling out, fear not. Limit 2 per customer.

i do graphic art, and i'd like to get paid $1000 if i could.. $25,000 would pay my debt, and still leave me with enough on a down payment ona hoouse...